Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Toca v. Rojas, 93 So. 108.

46 citing documents.

Carbon v. Allstate Ins. Co. 719 So. 2d 437 La. 1998
Carbon v. Allstate Ins. Co. 701 So. 2d 462 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Foster v. COLONEL SANDERS KY. FRIED CHICKEN, INC. 526 So. 2d 252 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
Pizzo v. Graves 453 So. 2d 592 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
Flannigan v. Valliant 400 So. 2d 225 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Deshotel v. Casualty Reciprocal Exch. 350 So. 2d 283 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
Frazer v. Day 307 So. 2d 733 La. 1975
Turner v. Bucher 308 So. 2d 270 La. 1975
McDonald v. Terrebonne Parish School Board 253 So. 2d 558 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Deshotel v. Travelers Indemnity Company 231 So. 2d 448 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1970
Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v. Quincy Mut. Fire Ins. Co. 220 So. 2d 104 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1969
1st Cir. 1964); , 93 So.
McCrossen v. Stoyka 218 So. 2d 669 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1969
53 , , that an admission by a minor respecting the commission of an offense was hearsay and clearly inadmissible in a suit against the father to recover damages therefor, , 93 So.
Williams v. City of Baton Rouge 214 So. 2d 138 La. 1968
Davis v. Allstate Insurance Co. 206 So. 2d 748 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1968
Guidry v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. 201 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
606 (Orl.App.1929); , 93 So.
Taylor v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 178 So. 2d 238 La. 1965
Fabre v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company 167 So. 2d 448 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1964
As recognizing this rule, , 93 So.
Redd v. Bohannon 166 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
Malveaux v. Buller 135 So. 2d 368 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1961
Watkins v. Cupit 130 So. 2d 720 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
Counsel for defendant urges that the trial court erred in its interpretation of LSA-Civil Code Article 2318 , 93 So.
McInnis v. Terry 121 So. 2d 329 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
Polk v. TRINITY UNIVERSAL INS. CO. OF DALLAS, TEX. 115 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1959
Hawayek v. Simmons 91 So. 2d 49 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
Jackson v. Ratliff 84 So. 2d 103 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1956
Simmons v. Sorenson 71 So. 2d 377 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1954
Indiana Lumbermens Mut. Ins. v. Darcental 70 So. 2d 460 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1954
Wooten v. Thompson 69 So. 2d 557 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1953
LaRue v. Adam 59 So. 2d 839 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1952
Succession of Yeates 35 So. 2d 210 La. 1948
Cox v. Shreveport Packing Co. 34 So. 2d 373 La. 1948
Phillips v. D'Amico 21 So. 2d 748 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1945
As recognizing this rule, , 93 So.
Bates v. Blitz 17 So. 2d 816 La. 1944
Bourgeois v. Bourgeois 12 So. 2d 278 La. 1943
Gott v. Scott 199 So. 460 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
Johnson v. Butterworth, supra; , 93 So.
Spiro v. Corliss 174 So. 285 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1937
Officer v. American Ins. Co. 162 So. 771 La. 1935
Johnson v. Butterworth 157 So. 121 La. 1934
The converse of the proposition, however, which is appropriate here, , 93 So.
Hopkins v. Dalferes 153 So. 367 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Johnson v. Butterworth 152 So. 166 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1934
Streat v. Unity Industrial Life Ins. Co. 143 So. 106 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
318 , ; Executors of Haggerty v. *108 Powell, 6 La.
Stortz v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 141 So. 814 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1932
318 , , ’ the plaintiff sued for damages for the use of his minor son, who, he alleged, was injured in the eye by the hook of a fish line negligently handled by the defendant’s son.
Maloney v. Goelz 124 So. 606 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
But the Supreme Court of this State, in Toca vs. Rojas, , 93 So.
Hennessy v. Daigle 123 So. 900 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
33 ; Toca vs. Rozaz, , 93 So.
Day v. Armour Fertilizer Works 8 La. App. 720 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1928
Rutley v. Honor & Co. 7 La. App. 164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1927
Toca vs. Rojas, , 93 South.
Townsend v. Missouri Pacific Railroad 3 La. App. 598 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1925
33 ; and *607 Toca vs. Rojas, , 93 South.